All these resources are on-line so there is no excuse for not using them. Even a cursory knowledge of Koine Greek is extremely useful for Bible study.

Latin is also useful for studying theology. If you have a good knowledge of the English language and even a cursory knowledge of one or two romance languages, such as Spanish or French, then you already know a lot of Latin. While it just takes a little practice, you can learn to read a lot of Latin just from the root words you already know from being an English speaker. Where you will be deficient is Latin grammar and the ability to construct a sentence. But you should be able to decifer some Latin even with a basic vocabulary.

For instance, if you don’t know Latin, can you guess at the meanings of several words in the Latin version of Irenaeus’ Against Heresies?

Using the English words before, much, time, see, under, toward, end, reign and Domitian, can you make a guess as to what the translation is?

Most theology up until about 300 years ago was written in Latin and many theological works of just 100 years ago, such as Systematic Theology by Charles Hodge, quote directly from Latin and Greek without translation. These theologians assumed the reader could decifer a few short quotations.

In fact, “literacy” in past centuries meant you could read in different languages. In Harvard’s founding documents, the Puritans wrote: “One of the next things we longed for and looked after was to advance learning and perpetuate it to posterity: dreading to leave an illiterate ministry to the churches, when our present ministers shall lie in the dust.” The entrance examination to most colleges included a portion that needed to be written in Latin and in Greek. The Puritans who were to be trained for the ministry were expected to be proficient in these languages by the age of 13. Certainly, we can accomplish a fraction of the intellectual achievement that our forefathers thought of as common knowledge.

I am not a biblical language scholar and I’ve never studied these languages in depth, but I realize it is important to know some Greek and Latin to understand some major issues in theology. As an example, consider the following question:

When was the book of Revelation written?

The vast majority of scholars have held that Revelation was written toward the end of the reign of Domitian around 96 AD. This is based on one paragraph from Irenaeus.

Irenaeus (c. AD 120-200) was bishop of Lugdunum in Gaul, which is now Lyons, France. His writings were formative in the early development of Christian theology. He was a disciple of Polycarp, who himself was a disciple of the Apostle John.

Irenaeus is thought to have been a Greek from Polycarp’s hometown of Smyrna in Asia Minor, now Izmir, Turkey. The author of five books, Against Heresies, this second century apologist was a champion of orthodoxy and documents the reception of the New Testament books through the Church Fathers who bridged the time between the Apostles and Irenaeus day.

Here is the English translation of Irenaeus:

We will not, however, incur the risk of pronouncing positively as to the name of Antichrist; for if it were necessary that his name should be distinctly revealed in this present time, it would have been announced by him who beheld the apocalyptic vision. For [it or he] was seen not very long time since, but almost in our generation, towards the end of Domitian’s reign” (Irenaeus, Adversus haereses 5.30.3).

In Greek, Irenaeus writes literally: “Not therefore before long time that was seen …”

The phrase “that was seen” comes from a verb in Greek. It can mean “he/she/it was seen” – and it can refer either to the Apostle John or the vision described in the book of Revelation. However, if we look at the context of what is being discussed, Irenaeus is saying that if John knew who the identity of the Beast was, he didn’t communicate it to anyone.

Irenaeus writes elsewhere that he had known some Church Fathers, such as Papias and Polycarp, who had seen and heard John preach. If John knew the identity of the Beast of Revelation, he didn’t tell any of them. Therefore, it was John “that was seen not very long time since” in the last years of Domitian’s reign, not the book Revelation (see John 21:20-25).

The assumption that Irenaeus is decribing the date of Revelation’s writing can be traced back to Eusebius in his Ecclesiastical History. In speaking of the persecution under the Roman emperor Domitian, Eusebius states:

In this persecution, it is handed down by tradition, that the apostle John, who was yet living, in consequence of his testimony to the divine word, was condemned to dwell on the island of Patmos. Irenaeus, indeed, in his fifth book against the heresies, where he speaks of the calculation formed on the epithet of Antichrist, in the above mentioned revelation of John, speaks in the following manner respecting him. “We will not, however, incur the risk of pronouncing positively as to the name of Antichrist; for if it were necessary that his name should be distinctly revealed in this present time, it would have been announced by him who beheld the apocalyptic vision. For that was seen no very long time since, but almost in our day, towards the end of Domitian’s reign” (Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 3.18).

Note that Eusebius assumes “that was seen” in Irenaeus’ statement refers to “the Revelation,” and not to “John.” On this basis, Eusebius places the writing of Revelation during the time of Domitian. This assumption has been repeated by thousands of other writers. Note also that all the existing copies of Irenaeus are in Latin, except for these fragments of the original Greek quoted in Eusebius and elsewhere. The ambiguous subtlety of the Greek version is not as clear in the Latin translation. Even though Eusebius was writing in Greek, he still interpreted “that was seen” incorrectly. Eusebius’ assumption has ever since obstructed a clear understanding of the book of Revelation. Without this error, we can interpret Revelation to apply to events from 64 to 70 AD (the Great Tribulation) because we can conclude from other evidence that it was written in the reign of Caesar Nero, in the same time period as most of the New Testament books.

Now with the Internet, there are literally hundreds of articles explaining the issue of Revelation’s dating. The layman no longer needs to rely on an expert or a Bible commentary to tell him when the book of Revelation was written. He doesn’t have to own the expensive multi-volume, Ante-Nicene Fathers by Phillip Schaff to read Irenaeus. He can go directly to the source for free.

The problem is that it is not clear whether the subject of the Greek verb refers back to John or the apocalypse.

Perhaps the writer was confused with the Latin translation (which denotes gender in the passive perfect tense (though neuter – visum est – or so it is thought, which makes the passage problematic since it can refer to neither John – visus est – nor the apocalypse – visa est).

As I said in the article, I am neither a Greek nor Latin scholar by any stretch. But my understanding is that even the vision – visio – does not work here either, since it is a feminine noun.

By CONTEXT alone, I would say that Irenaeus was saying simply in paraphrase: “If it were necessary for us to know the meaning of 666, John could have announced it (told it verbally) because he was seen recently — almost in our day — during the time of Domitian.”

It makes less sense to say that the vision was seen almost in our day, since that is not cause for John announcing the meaning of 666.

Amazing Grace: The History and Theology of Calvinism (DVD)

Does this teaching make man a deterministic robot and God the author of sin? What about free will? If the church accepts Calvinism, won’t evangelism be stifled, perhaps even extinguished? How can we balance God’s sovereignty and man’s responsibility? What are the differences between historic Calvinism and hyper-Calvinism? Why did men like Augustine, Luther, Calvin, Spurgeon, Whitefield, Edwards and a host of renowned Protestant evangelists embrace the teaching of predestination and election and deny free will theology?

This is the first video documentary that answers these and other related questions. Hosted by Eric Holmberg, this fascinating three-part, four-hour presentation is detailed enough so as to not gloss over the controversy. At the same time, it is broken up into ten “Sunday-school-sized” sections to make the rich content manageable and accessible for the average viewer.

Why Creeds and Confessions? (Book)

High Quality Paperback — 219 pages

Foundations in Biblical Orthodoxy

﻿Driving down a country road sometime, you might see a church with a sign proudly proclaiming: “No book but the Bible — No creed but Christ.” The problem with this statement is that the word creed (from the Latin: credo) simply means “belief.” All Christians have beliefs, regardless of whether they are written.

Yet a single book containing the actual texts of the most important creeds of the early Church will not often be found. Out of the multitude of works on the evangelical Christian book market today, those dealing with the creeds of the Church are scarce.

Why Creeds and Confessions? provides a foundation of biblical orthodoxy as a defense against the false and truly heretical doctrines advanced by the spirit of this age.

The Real Jesus: A Defense of the Historicity and Divinity of Christ (DVD)

Who is the Real Jesus?

Ever since the dawn of modern rationalism, skeptics have sought to use textual criticism, archeology and historical reconstructions to uncover the “historical Jesus” — a wise teacher who said many wonderful things, but fulfilled no prophecies, performed no miracles and certainly did not rise from the dead in triumph over sin.

Over the past 100 years, however, startling discoveries in biblical archeology and scholarship have all but vanquished the faulty assumptions of these doubting modernists. Regrettably, these discoveries have often been ignored by the skeptics as well as by the popular media. As a result, the liberal view still holds sway in universities and impacts the culture and even much of the church.

The Real Jesus explodes the myths of these critics and the movies, books and television programs that have popularized their views. Presented in ten parts — perfect for individual, family and classroom study — viewers will be challenged to go deeper in their knowledge of Christ in order to be able to defend their faith and present the truth to a skeptical modern world – that the Jesus of the Gospels is the Jesus of history — “the same yesterday, today and forever” (Hebrews 13:8). He is the real Jesus.

In the Days of These Kings (Book)

Perfect-bound Paperback — 740 pages

The Book of Daniel in Preterist Perspective

“And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever” (Daniel 2:44).

The overarching message of Daniel is that Jesus the Messiah is even now ruling over the nations. He is the King of kings. Daniel tells us that Messiah’s kingdom will advance in the whole world from “generation to generation” (Daniel 4:4,34). Christ’s dominion is “given to the people of the saints of the most High” (Daniel 7:22). Our purpose then is to see “all people, nations, and languages … serve and obey him” (Daniel 7:14,27).

This comprehensive work offers a fascinating look at the book of Daniel in preterist perspective. Great attention is paid to the writings of ancient and modern historians and scholars to connect the dots and demonstrate the continuity of Daniel’s prophecy with all of Scripture.

Go Stand Speak (DVD)

With “preaching to the lost” being such a basic foundation of Christianity, why do many in the church seem to be apathetic on this issue of preaching in highways and byways of towns and cities?

Is it biblical to stand in the public places of the world and proclaim the gospel, regardless if people want to hear it or not?

Does the Bible really call church pastors, leaders and evangelists to proclaim the gospel in the public square as part of obedience to the Great Commission, or is public preaching something that is outdated and not applicable for our day and age?

The Abortion Matrix:
Defeating Child Sacrifice and the Culture of Death is a 195-minute presentation that traces the biblical roots of child sacrifice and then delves into the social, political and cultural fall-out that this sin against God has produced. You can order this series on DVD, read the complete script and view clips on-line...continued ...